# What is Dgraph lacking?

**URL:** <https://discuss.dgraph.io/t/what-is-dgraph-lacking/16010>\
**Category:** Dgraph\
**Created:** [November 9, 2021, 10:47pm UTC](https://discuss.dgraph.io/t/what-is-dgraph-lacking/16010 "2021-11-09T22:47:47Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Schartey](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/discuss.dgraph.io/schartey/32/8136_2.png) [@Schartey](https://discuss.dgraph.io/u/Schartey)\
**Post date:** [November 9, 2021, 11:40pm UTC](https://discuss.dgraph.io/t/what-is-dgraph-lacking/16010/3 "2021-11-09T23:40:42Z")

</div>

Maybe I have the wrong impression, but I think the community is overall very satisfied with DGraph and I don’t see reasons for such a hard change in direction.

I think none of the questions are real issues, or at least I don’t see many posts about them.  
What I see is that people need better GraphQL support with the most important missing features being:

- Nested Filters
- Cascade triggers
- More sofisticated auth (update-after, easier definition of auth rules)

Generally I and others would like

- More educational material
- Some docs that allow us to get into the DGraph code easier, so we can contribute
- Transparent roadmap, open issues and bugs, so we don’t get surprised by missing features or minor bugs (I realised too late that there are no nested filters)

In the end I would like to thank you for your transparency. Like many others I love DGraph and you give me more confidence to trust in your product.

Edit: In short:  
Dgraph should stay a database. It’s amazing but needs more stability. At the same time I love GraphQL as my main access point and DQL/Lambda as secondary.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.dgraph.io/t/what-is-dgraph-lacking/16010)._